Foreign Policy mag fights suit by Abbas's son

11/17/12 4:55 PM EST

Foreign Policy magazine is asking a federal court to toss out a libel suit filed by Yasser Abbas, a son of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, over a commentary the international affairs journal published in June suggesting that Yasser Abbas has grown wealthy due to his father’s political position.

In legal papers filed this month in U.S. District Court, Foreign Policy—a division of the Washington Post Co.—argues that Abbas’s lawsuit is part of a pattern of litigation aimed at intimidating his critics.

Foreign Policy’s attorneys also argue that the lawsuit should be dismissed in accordance with a District of Columbia law passed in 2010 and aimed at ensuring robust debate on issues of public significance.

“While Abbas’s legal strategy might sometimes be effective in places in the world with lesser protection for freedom of speech and the press than in the United States, it certainly cannot pass muster under the First Amendment – let alone in the District of Columbia, which has enacted legislation to address this precise scenario, which involves a classic Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation,” lawyers Kevin Baine of Williams and Connolly and Nathan Siegel of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz wrote in the Nov. 5 motion to dismiss (posted here).

So-called anti-SLAPP laws allow for the expedited dismissal of defamation suits when a plaintiff does not have evidence at the outset of a case that he or she is likely to prevail. They’ve been passed in numerous states and jurisdictions to crack down on the practice of companies and individuals filing lawsuits that can drain a target financially even if the suits have little chance of ultimate success on the merits.

It’s not entirely clear that the D.C. anti-SLAPP law applies in federal court, but the magazine’s lawyers say the weight of legal precedent suggests that it does.

Foreign Policy also filed a separate motion arguing that Abbas’s suit should be dismissed because the commentary, written by Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies was largely a question-raising exercise that did not make factual assertions, was essentially opinion protected by the First Amendment, and generally didn’t meet the definition of libelous material.

The case is pending before Judge Emmet Sullivan, who has not yet ruled on the motions. (Yasser Abbas's complaint against Foreign Policy, the Post company and Schanzer, was filed in September and is available here courtesy of Courthouse News.)

The Abbas lawsuit evokes a libel case filed against the Washington Post itself three decades ago by William Tavoulareas, the head of Mobil Oil, and his son Peter, over a 1979 news article arguing that Peter had won shipping business from Mobil as a result of his father's position. That case went to trial and resulted in a $2 million verdict against the Post. However, the judge who presided over the trial granted a post-trial motion tossing out the verdict and the suit.